raid
Dad Photographer
I never understand this, what a lens looks like is irrelevant, what it performs like IS important.
Not really; the lens should be both. The performance is necessary but it is not sufficient. Another example is the Heliar 50/3.5 rigid. It is as sharp as the collapsible, but nobody want the ugly duckling.
John Robertson
Well-known
Sorry Raid, the relevance of a lens's "beauty" still escapes me, as long as it is optically and mechanically sound, unless of course it is male jewelery
I worked in a friends camera shop at weekends for many years, and there was undoubtedly an element of this. We used to have quite a laugh about it, and take bets on the results behind the scenes.
I worked in a friends camera shop at weekends for many years, and there was undoubtedly an element of this. We used to have quite a laugh about it, and take bets on the results behind the scenes.
bcostin
Well-known
rbiemer
Unabashed Amateur
I got lucky and got what I think is an original hood with my rigid I-50. Doesn't help a lot. But I mostly see just a bit of the hood in the VF so it doesn't bother me.
Rob
Rob
mh2000
Well-known
Oh come on! (And besides the I-50 is only ok in performance... certainly nothing to get overly excited about)... they do look a little better in SLR mount.
I never understand this, what a lens looks like is irrelevant, what it performs like IS important.
mh2000
Well-known
anyone mount a I-50 on their camera over a pretty white Jupiter-8 when you have both sitting on your shelf?
pesphoto
Veteran
haha, I stumbled upon this photo in yoru Flickr while googling around and it is why I bought my own series V hood, so thanks! YOu should see this lens and hood combo on my Zorki 2c, a think of beauty!
Last edited:
newspaperguy
Well-known
Beauty treatment for the I-50
Cut a +/- 1/2" wide strip of thin leather and glue it around that bare aluminum base and you've transformed the beast. Even a strip of black masking tape helps to improve the appearance.
Cut a +/- 1/2" wide strip of thin leather and glue it around that bare aluminum base and you've transformed the beast. Even a strip of black masking tape helps to improve the appearance.
Dave Wilkinson
Veteran
Here...Here! - common sense, at last!......everyone says this one's ugly too, - but do I care!....it gives f*#&ing good results!!Sorry Raid, the relevance of a lens's "beauty" still escapes me, as long as it is optically and mechanically sound, unless of course it is male jewelery
I worked in a friends camera shop at weekends for many years, and there was undoubtedly an element of this. We used to have quite a laugh about it, and take bets on the results behind the scenes.![]()
Attachments
ZorkiKat
ЗоркийК&
Beauty treatment for the I-50
Cut a +/- 1/2" wide strip of thin leather and glue it around that bare aluminum base and you've transformed the beast. Even a strip of black masking tape helps to improve the appearance.
Something like this, Rick?

http://jay.fedka.com/index_files/Page521.htm
A little beautification project I did on the I-50 years back....first mentioned this at the Russian camera forum. Got the idea from looking at the base of the Elmar 9cm lens. This lens has got a similar trim.
The leatherette cover not only has cosmetic value; it also gives the lens barrel a better grip when mounting or removing the lens from the camera.
The black version known as the I-50-2 does look better. But I must agree, the I-50 is and excellent lens, just like any good Tessar.
Last edited:
Dave Wilkinson
Veteran
Very nice!.....I wish I had the time, - and indeed the inclination to pratt about like this, - with a £6 lens of indifferent quallity!Something like this, Rick?
![]()
http://jay.fedka.com/index_files/Page521.htm
A little beautification project I did on the I-50 years back....first mentioned this at the Russian camera forum. Got the idea from looking at the base of the Elmar 9cm lens. This lens has got a similar trim.
The leatherette cover not only has cosmetic value; it also gives the lens barrel a better grip when mounting or removing the lens from the camera.
The black version known as the I-50-2 does look better. But I must agree, the I-50 is and excellent lens, just like any good Tessar.
pesphoto
Veteran
I like that ZorkiKat, might give it a go myself
-doomed-
film is exciting
I like this lense and while it is ugly, it nets decent results and can be had cheap. I have it in black , which is slightly less hideous.
I have a few shots in the member galleries that I got from it, but as the OP shows a hood makes it a bit less ugly.
I have a few shots in the member galleries that I got from it, but as the OP shows a hood makes it a bit less ugly.
rbiemer
Unabashed Amateur
That should read, "Doesn't help the ugly a lot". The hood does make a difference with flare.I got lucky and got what I think is an original hood with my rigid I-50. Doesn't help a lot. But I mostly see just a bit of the hood in the VF so it doesn't bother me.
Rob
I thought I'd posted a photo of the R2a and I-50 before but I apparently didn't. So:

And the view of the lens I see is something like this:

I don't really have much to share that I've taken with this lens yet; it functions fine, I'm just not happy with my work with it. Hope fully I'll get something good to put into the one camera one lens gallery.
Rob
Share:
-
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.